As someone born during the back end of the Pig-in-the-Python cohort (1955), I spent the first half of my life being told “You should’ve been here five years ago, before everything got used up & worn out & overcrowded” and the second half being told “It’s too late for you old people, you’ll just have to resign yourself to being obsolete.” So I’m somewhat allergic to the strict-constructionist timeline where distinct sociopolitical “generations” can be sliced off and sealed into neat ideological packages like deli meat.
But I do think Mark Ames, at the Exiled Online, has captured an important trend among anti-authoritarian politically-aware Americans since approximately the days of the “Reagan Revolution / Moral Majority / Morning-in-America” backlash in the 1980s in his essay on the Stewart/Colbert “Rally to Restore Vanity: Gen X Celebrates Its Homeric Struggle Against Lameness”.
Only (by the evidence of any recent thread here) it’s a mindset that’s liable to infect all of us liberal/progressive/anti-conservative/not-batshite-insane Americans, not just those born between certain calendar dates:
A century-old ideological movement, Liberalism: once devoted to impossible causes like ending racism and inequality, empowering the powerless, fighting against militarism, and all that silly hippie shit—now it’s been reduced to besting the other side at one-liners…and to the Liberals’ credit, they’re clearly on top. Sure there are a lot of problems out there, a lot of pressing needs—but the main thing is, the Liberals don’t look nearly as stupid as the other guys do. And if you don’t know how important that is to this generation, then you won’t understand what’s so wrong and so deeply depressing about the Jon Stewart Rally to Restore Sanity.
__
That’s what makes this rally so depressing and grotesque: It’s an anti-rally, a kind of mass concession speech without the speech–some kind of sick funeral party for Liberalism, in which Liberals are led, at last, by a clown. Not a figurative clown, but by a clown–and Liberals are sure that this somehow makes them smarter and less lame–and indeed, they are less lame, because they are not taking themselves too seriously, which is something they’re very, very proud of. All great political struggles and ideological advances, all great human rights achievements were won by clown-led crowds of people who don’t take themselves too seriously, duh! That’s why they’re following a clown like Stewart, whose entire political program comes down to this: not being stupid, the way the other guys are stupid–or when being stupid, only stupid in a self-consciously stupid way, which is to say, not stupid. That’s it, that’s all this is about: Not to protest wars or oligarchical theft or declining health care or crushing debt or a corrupt political system or imperial decay—nope, the only thing that motivates Liberals to gather in the their thousands is the chance to celebrate their own lack of stupidity! Woo-hoo!
[…] __
I’ve come to the conclusion that this has been the Great Dream of my generation: to position ourselves in such a way that we’re beyond mockery. To not look stupid. That’s the biggest crime of all–looking stupid. That’s why they’ve turned Stewart into a demigod, because he knows how to make the other guys look really stupid, and if you’re on the same team as Stewart, you’re on the safe side of the mockery, rather than dangerously vulnerable to mockery.
__
In fact, I think this is why so many Gen-X/Yers turned against Obama: because he made them look stupid. They made themselves vulnerable to looking stupid by believing in him–and he jilted them. That’s how they see it–not that politics is a long ugly process that has nothing to do with self-esteem and everything to do with money and brawling–it was more like an “indie” consumer choice: They bought into the Obama brand, wore it, and suddenly discovered that the label wasn’t as cool as it seemed at the time, especially after the sentimental high of electing a half-black president wore off to the hard slog of what came after… so they threw the Obama jeans away and went to work trying to salvage their coolness creds for having made that fashion mistake.
beergoggles
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Bnut
Voting for Obama does not make this Gen-Y’er feel stupid or uncool. Thinking he could solve all our problems quickly is a feature of youth, not a bug.
blah blah blah
kinda seems like that article is doing the exactly the same thing it’s complaining about…
lets complain about john stewart some more for not being exactly perfect in every way…
sherifffruitfly
It’s worse than this. Many were simply pretending to be onboard with Obama, and in fact they were just waiting for anything less than perfect to happen to jump ship and start bitching and whining.
slag
Lame.
John - A Motley Moose
Cute, but I’ll have to side with slag on this one – lame.
Restrung
I’m cooler than all y’all. Don’t have to prove it. That’s how cool.
DFS
This is a typical Ames thing in that it has some decent ideas surrounded by a great big cloud of scattershot invective.
I think his basic assessment of the Stewart/Colbert rally is right on, though.
Dennis SGMM
@sherifffruitfly:
Simply pretending to be on board with Obama? You’ve moved beyond straw and on to macrame. It just might be that some of them, after nearly a decade of despondency, had high hopes only to see them dashed for a number of reasons. It may be that they believed that “Yes we can,” and when it turned out that “No we can’t,” they became disenchanted and more than a little bitter. That’s human nature – not duplicity.
Linda Featheringill
@DFS:
I agree.
Mithras
Perhaps the stupidest thing I have read today, and I read this blog faithfully.
cleek
fuck you
dan
I think more than a few people went to the Stewart rally simply because they thought it might be fun. And it seemed like it was.
Mock people for going to a Bon Jovi concert, if you want, but they had fun.
Now as for Obama …
samson
That’s stupid.
In so many ways.
slag
@John – A Motley Moose: It’s funny. Sometimes even I don’t know when I’m being ironic. And I wonder if the author of this piece has the same problem.
The Rally to Restore Sanity was, by and large, an uprising against reductionism. This piece is nothing if not reductionist while seeming to decry reductionism. Reading it was like looking into a mirror looking into a mirror looking into a mirror…
So, seriously. Lame.
Tyro
Ames obviously thinks that this is a lame reason to be pissed at Obama, but Obama did do that to his supporters, and it’s a pretty damn good reason to be pissed.
Citizen_X
Jesus, does that ever bear repeating.
Dennis SGMM
@cleek:
Heh! I’ve never lacked enough stupidity to be able to celebrate.
Matt Mangels
If Angry Black Lady has her own blog why is she posting here? No harm to her, but I could do without her as a contributor to this blog.
bogart
Shorter this asshole…
“View politics the same way I do, you damn kids.”
See if the GenX/Y Generations don’t get more done when we take the reigns than the Boomers ever did, mostly because we won’t take ourselves so damn seriously.
Citizen_X
@Matt Mangels: Um, ABL has nothing to do with this post.
slag
@Mithras:
Haha!
Just Some Fuckhead
@Matt Mangels:
I find her rather amusing. But if I had to guess, it’s prolly cuz we were running out of Obots. They need an echo chamber to feel validated.
FYI, it was Anne Laurie that wrote this post.
slag
@Matt Mangels:
That’s odd. I was thinking the same thing about your comment.
Silver
@Matt Mangels:
Well, I happen to like her stuff.
Unlike your comment here, for example, which is off topic and written by a fucking idiot.
monkeyboy
I can think of very few people who like to be perceived as being stupid. (Maybe some women think there is an advantage in a “dumb bimbo” image).
People who listen to Limbaugh do it because they think he insightful, intelligent, and edgy, and repeat what he says so that they too can be perceived that way.
Not wanting to seem dumb is not a monopoly of Liberals.
Corner Stone
Who’s been wearing the Mom Jeans?
Matt Mangels
How can there be an off-topic comment in an open thread? Impossible. Check the post title. Yeesh. And I know that Annie is the author of this post, btw.
Anne Laurie
@Matt Mangels: __
Are you under the impression that all non-y-chromosome front-pagers here are identical? If so, FOAD.
If not, go ask this question of Angry Black Lady, who is quite capable of defending herself.
Or ask it of the blog owner, who from past practice will tell you to FOAD, but more bluntly.
Andrew
OK, seriously, I’m getting a little tired of blogospheric navel-gazing about Obama.
I’m pissed about the tax cuts thing too, but, jeebus people, get a grip.
I think it’s just that time of the year and a delayed reaction to the midterms.
Am I happy with Obama right now? No. But I also remember how much deader Clinton and Reagan were in ’94 and ’82 respectively. Things may suck, but life goes on.
PurpleGirl
@Matt Mangels: (1) Anne Laurie wrote this post. (2) Our host invited ABL to post here. (3) We’ve come to like her and had a thread several days ago wherein we told her so and asked her to keep posting. My advice to you: Get lost or learn how to scroll past a poster you don’t like.
Dennis SGMM
@bogart:
Call me when you’ve stopped a war.
Matt Mangels
Ummm no Anne, I’m not. I thought that open threads were a place where nothing is off-topic, and I just thought I’d take advantage of that to say something that was on my mind. I kind of can’t believe how mean you guys are. I’m just saying that I don’t particularly care for ABL’s posts. Just like some of you don’t like ED’s posts.
Citizen_X
@Matt Mangels:
Well, welcome to the monkey house, sparky!
Kryptik
I’m sorry, but this article is beyond retarded. This reductionist argument that the liberal movement has simply boiled down to ‘don’t look stupid’ is ironically the stupidest thing I’ve every fucking heard. Not only that, it ignores so many of the fucking reasons liberals, progressives, dems, and generally sane people who haven’t bought into the media malaise have been fucking despondent as of late. It’s not about ‘don’t make us look stupid’. If you really want to get down to it, it’s ‘Don’t dumb down America.’ ‘Don’t Make America Look Stupid.’ And that’s honestly, that’s what the GOP has been doing time and time again. Preying on the stupidity of some of the electorate, applying it with a broad brush, and then claiming it’s Dems who are looking down on them. And because so many fucking Dem leaders are without spine to fight back, the public ends up agreeing with them, if only on label.
If you want a fucking article, Mr. Ames, then fucking write this one: ‘Designer Democracy’. An article about how fucking policy doesn’t matter any more, only labels do. Because pretty much all the issues with ‘Democratic policy’ doesn’t come from the ‘policy’ part. It’s the ‘Democratic’ part. Republicans have stained the Democratic and Liberal brands so most modern Americans refuse to be associated with them even when they agree with the actual substance. You want to call Dems and Libs hipsters or something lame like that? Call the Republicans shucksters. Call them nothing but glorified marketers. Because that’s what they do. They market a name without a product. And we as a culture have become so inundated to accept things by name and brand, not by the substance.
There, I fucking wrote out the basis for your next article, Mr. Ames, and it’s something that actually has some fucking grounding in reality.
Tyro
Call me when you’ve stopped a war.
One of the things that drove the left to the brink of insanity in the early 70s was precisely the fact that the boomers couldn’t stop the war in Vietnam. Boomers do a lot of self-back-patting over having protested against something when they have very few results to show for it.
DecidedFenceSitter
@Matt Mangels: Hey sweet heart, if you they are being mean NOW you ain’t seen nothing.
There are times I miss the Stormy/Darrell days. Or John making “[X] of the left” comments. Or the White Phosphorous blow-out.
Damn, I’ve been reading this blog for a while.
slag
@Matt Mangels:
Is this a joke? You come here complaining about an fper. And then bitch about how mean WE are? Hilarious. You must be a Republican.
PurpleGirl
@Kryptik: Maybe I’m thick tonight, but I really didn’t understand what Ames was saying. Thank you for your restatement, summary and response. You I could understand.
Tyro
This reductionist argument that the liberal movement has simply boiled down to ‘don’t look stupid’ is ironically the stupidest thing I’ve every fucking heard. Not only that, it ignores so many of the fucking reasons liberals, progressives, dems, and generally sane people who haven’t bought into the media malaise have been fucking despondent as of late.
One of the fun parts of columns is also one of the problems with the modern op-ed format: it essentially boils down to, “hey, this is a neat idea I had. Let me run with it and expand it into column length.” Yes, it’s reductionist bullshit, but I’m sure Ames had a great time thinking it up and putting it together. It’s pretty entertaining to read, as well.
Maody
when, oh when is the circular firing squad going to stop. must agree on some of his ideas just a teeny bit, but like Kryptik, start hauling out a can o’ whoop ass on the fucking republicans and enter the long, hard struggle for change. i swan, there is a time to reflect on strategies used on the ‘general welfare’ side [read: liberal], but kick the can over to the right side and make ’em tell us how much they’ve fucked over this country for a change.
everything is much more complicated than some dimwit coolness meme.
JMC_in_the_ATL
@Matt Mangels: One major difference between ED and ABL is that ABL actually reads and responds to comments on her own threads. With ED, it doesn’t matter *where* you bitch about him, he’ll never read it.
monkeyboy
In Jonathan Haidt’s 5 dimensional analysis of morality, one dimensions “Loyalty” is highly present in conservatives and much less present in liberals.
Conservatives are highly invested in in-group loyalty and can hardly understand how someone who is not black or not gay could support the rights of those groups (unless it involves some conspiracy).
Conservatives invest effort in both loyalty and intelligence, while liberals are mostly invested in intelligence.
Liberals main fear is being considered stupid while conservatives may fear being considered un-loyal more than stupid.
Matt Mangels
Ok, I’ve learned my lesson. I promise to never ever post an opinion here in the comments that you guys don’t like. I am sorry for disagreeing.
And as for the Gentleman who called me a Republican, well, by the way I’m being shat on for expressing a dissenting opinion here I think you guys need to remove the elephant from your own eyes first.
In all honesty, I love this blog. Read it every damn day, but probably comment on less than 1% of posts. Now I am being reminded why. This blog is a bit like how some people see ball sports; fun to watch, not as fun to participate in.
And just a note to ALL readers and authors of blogs everywhere: don’t want people talking about whatever the fuck they feel like in the comments? Don’t call the post an open thread.
bogart
Thanks, Tyro. Took the words right out of my wordhole.
And Dennis, even if it were true that you “stopped the war,” what have you done for me lately. You’re generation has control of everything right now, in all facets of American life. And still, to this minute, you’re still fighting the same culture wars you’ve been fighting for forty fucking years. The left is afraid of being viewed as America-hating hippies again, and the right still views the left as America-hating hippies, and nothing good happens. You’ve ran up unprecedented debt, cut your own taxes doing it, and let our entire infrastructure crumble. We’re going to have to clean this mess up. And the guy we thought actually understood how fucked up things have gotten apparently doesn’t, and is letting us down almost daily.
So excuse us if we choose to face this morass you’re leaving us with a little detached irony and humor. I think it will serve us well in the future.
DFS
Attempt to inject something interesting into the thread:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/matt-taibbi/blogs/TaibbiData_May2010/239443/83512
David Gergen mistakes Matt “Taibbi” for Matt “Bai” and spends a morning thoroughly perplexed as to why a milquetoast moderate New York Times political analyst would be shouting “fuck the business community” at him.
Jean
@Dennis SGMM:
“YES!”
When did liberals start allowing right-wingers to define terms and alter the truth?
All of the sudden, the engaged and passionate involvement of the ’60’s was that of “dirty fucking hippies.”
(And now any criticism of income inequality is dismissed as “class warfare.”)
Too much quibbling and dissention amongst the liberal ranks — too much inaction — the dfh’s would have stormed the barricades….
slag
@Matt Mangels: Wow. Nobody could have predicted that someone as insensitive as you could be so sensitive. Asshole.
Matt Mangels
Can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen slag.
Ellie
@Matt Mangels:
Of course, you’re right, dear. Open thread means talk about WeverTF you want to. It also means that everyone else is free to respond in kind.
Geez, this whining reminds me of all the wingnuts who think that “free speech” means being able to say any dumb shit thing that pops into their head without being criticized.
Jean
@Tyro:
The hippies made a difference. They told the truth about the Vietnam conflict in a vocal, in-your-face kind of protest, sustained over a long enough time that it gave the American people “permission” to view the war not as an inevitable manifestation of American patriotism, but as an immoral act.
JohnR
@Matt Mangels:
You’ve been reading the comments on ED’s posts and this still surprises you?
If pissy bitching produced energy, this blog could power half the US.
Anyway, ABL is annoying, sure, but why the Hell not? It does you good to read somebody that annoys the crap out of you at least once a day. It’s even better if you try to work through her arguments, as silly and emotional though they may be. Just keep reminding yourself she’s only a woman and therefore can’t help it..
freelancer
@Matt Mangels:
Jaysus, GBCW is so last week.
jeff
@DFS:
Yep. As is most of the zeitgeist/generational crap. I certainly don’t feel like there has been a common thread uniting my generation, other than being born in the 70s.
Jean
@bogart:
Clinton was the boomer president.
(Bush is the same generation, but from a different planet.)
Is Obama just a coward?
Just Some Fuckhead
@Matt Mangels:
Suck it up, get a better handle and keep at it. In no time flat you will have your own juniorhighschoolish clique and be hounding other infrequent commenters.
slag
@Matt Mangels: OK. Now I’m convinced. You’re engaging in some sort of performance art thing. Or maybe a sociological experiment. Nobody can possibly be this ironic unintentionally. Not even Mr. Ames here.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Jean:
No, he’s a conciliator.
Silver
@slag:
I’m guessing Kain sockpuppet, myself.
Jean
@Just Some Fuckhead:
He seems to be afraid of the Republicans.
themann1086
The part of this… piece… that grates on me the most is the gratuitous slam against people who don’t take themselves too seriously and act clownish at rallies. Erm, the anti-communist revolutions in most of the old bloc would like to have a word with you. [Via Padraic Kenney]
Davis X. Machina
Needs to be read against Ames’ 2004 classic, ‘Spite the Vote’.
Darkrose
@Matt Mangels:
Flounce moar.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Jean:
Why would he be afraid of Republicans?
Yutsano
Jeez. I take a nap and the blog asplodes. Now I’m afraid to go to work tomorrow cause of the mess that’ll be here. I’m gonna go get dinner. Try not to kill each other.
slag
@Silver: Interesting theory. They both do reek of woebegone white man syndrome.
Phoebe
@slag: Yes! Exactly. He completely missed the point [Ames, not this Matt guy, I don’t care about the Matt issue].
And most of the protests I’ve been to, with the earnest old-school liberals of his gen [and mine], seemed AT LEAST as much about self image as he claims Stewart is. Like holding candles on an intersection and braying homilies is going to do shit about the war. Yeah. I was at one of those feeling like an ass. But at least I wasn’t feeling good about myself, which appeared to be the purpose of the exercise.
When some douchebag in a passing car yelled, “towelheads!” at us, it cracked me up and I knew I was free to leave. And no, I don’t need Jon Stewart to tell me that he’s stupider, but standing on a dark intersection trying to keep my candle from blowing out, and not being able to hear the sincere person up front explain why war is bad to people who already know that, I didn’t feel a lot smarter.
eco2geek
Oh bullshit. 50,000 people turned out for a rally for Kerry in Portland in 2004. Anybody remember?
Oh bullshit. Stewart’s a demigod because he’s very funny while calling out politicians’ stupidity. If he wasn’t funny, nobody would watch his show.
Carry on with the name-calling.
Dennis SGMM
@bogart:
I’m 62 years old. What have you done for you lately?
Odie Hugh Manatee
@Darkrose:
Flounce LOUDER!
Anyone who claims to be a long time reader here usually isn’t. That or they don’t know how to read.
slag
@Davis X. Machina: Holy crap. No wonder this guy hated that rally. He epitomizes everything it was rallying against. He–quite rightly–felt impugned. Well…that’s good.
JC
Good Obama things:
1. Universal health care – as damaged as it is, written into law.
2. Financial reform law – not good enough, but better than Clinton, and of course much better than any Rethug.
3. Prevented the collapse of the automakers.
4. Subjected Big Tobacco to regulation (The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Tobacco Control Act)
5. Brought 100,000 troops back from Iraq.
6. Invested 200 billion in clean energy
7. Lily Ledbetter Act
8. Hate crime protection for gays and lesbians
9. Staved off a possible 2nd depression
10. Massive stimulus act, though not big enough.
11. Consumer Protection Act (within Financial Reform)
12. 100 Billion for Education (within Recovery Act)
13. Lots of evidence of calmly and practically restoring America’s reputation in the world, one data point of evidence being Iran – where we got China and Russia to go along with strong sanctions, which they didn’t do for Bush.
I’m sure there is more.
Obama also did this in the face of MUCH LESS of a Senate coalition backing him (59) than Johnson (68) or Roosevelt (69) had, while having unprecedented unified opposition, and a completely broken Senate. From Talking Points:
“How many Senators do you need to get on the floor to break a filibuster? 60.
How many do you need on the floor to sustain one? 1.”
“You don’t have to do anything except sit there and be ready to stand up for 30 seconds and make an objection. So while the majority needs 60 Senators cooling their heels on the floor, the minority can just have one or two sitting there playing Angry Birds on their iPhones.”
Not to mention Big Business Democrats like Lieberman, Bayh, etc, who were willing to cross to vote with the Rethugs, if one of their fat cat backers were threatened.
What Obama has NOT done:
a. Put an end to Guantanomo, or really, the authoritarian security state processes, in a multitude of ways.
b. Still 50K troops in Iraq
c. Still troops in Afghanistan
d. end DADT
e. Repeal the Bush tax cuts (at least, this is how it looks).
What am I missing? Help me out here.
the last one – E – really STINGS for me, because, as I mentioned in another thread, when I started paying attention to politics in 1999, the economic plan offered by Bush was A JOKE. An obvious and discreditable LIE – and YET HE GOT AWAY WITH IT! And it turned a surplus for the nation, into a huge deficit.
That Bush will GET AWAY WITH IT AGAIN, just really really burns me. I don’t want it to happen. I want to start anew, and let the LIE EXPIRE.
People say that Obama isn’t ‘making the case’ stronger enough. that he ‘really’ doesn’t care about the people, he is a ‘center rightist’.
That seems crazy to me, but let’s look at what he is saying.
The 2nd thing I see on Obama’s facebook page, is Biden urging Congress to pass the MIDDLE CLASS tax cut, and unemployement benefits.
Lots of urging for the DREAM act.
Lots of urging to vote for repeal of DADT.
Urging to go forward with the Food Safety Modernization Act.
Urging to vote for START act.
More DREAM Act.
Disappointed with Rethugs (he doesn’t use that) that they voted against Paycheck Fairness Act.
Do these actions seem th actions of someone who is bought and paid for? Really?
I really really will be pissed, again, if Bush is able to ‘create his reality’ again, that the rich get a tax break that will only come out of the hide of social security. I really will.
But the reality is, this isn’t obama’s fault.
Cricket
Lordy, Ames really doesn’t get it.
People are sick of being screamed at, sick of the fake outrage, sick of being spoon fed the latest “scandal” about Michelle Obama’s unpatriotic choice of espadrilles. That is why people respond to Jon Stewart.
“Politics as entertainment” has taken over real news and created an environment where Glenn Beck, Keith Olbermann, Bill O’Reilly, Ed Schultz, et al get paid to scream at the top of their lungs about everything. One would hope that conservatives and liberals alike would be angry about having their views reduced to cant by such egotistical blowhards. I know I am.
The reductionist bullshit that has been written about the Stewart/Colbert rally both before and after is so very, very ironic.
Marc McKenzie
@JC: Thanks for injecting hard facts (and, sadly, uncomfortable truths) into this.
In other words, your comment is an island of sanity in a giant sea of shit.
Console
I sort of like the analysis. Like what was said above, it’s a “neat idea.” It’s interesting to play with even if it’s full of shit. In all reality Gen X/Yers didn’t leave Obama. Old white people did… the problem of progressive politics in america always hits the same wall. And that wall isn’t a lack of drive. It’s archie bunker. I understand the underlying sentiment though. A generation that could put together the rally to restore sanity could put that energy to something much more meaningful.
The Claw
I disagree. It’s not a fashion mistake. Obama (decent guy though he may be) won’t lead his team. Clinton wouldn’t lead. The search for a Dem President as iconic as R**gan continues.
The Dems aren’t sure what they stand for so why should the voters magically be expected to understand?
Republicans are happy with comforting lies and dog whistles. Being a Democrat is difficult. I’m not down on Obama but I sure wish someone out there wanted to lead
Console
To add to JC’s list, student loan reform was significant. One of those places where Obama did manage to make the bankers go fuck themselves.
Comrade Luke
Pretty good article at Daily Kos:
President Obama is neither weak nor stupid…nor a progressive.
slag
@Phoebe: This is interesting. Because I’ve so been there and felt exactly the same way. It’s weird. As if we haven’t found our voices but instead are relying on the dated modes of expression our predecessors used. It feels fake and kind of quaint. Like using a manual typewriter to write out our manifestos.
iriedc
@Annie Laurie Love your post except for this one. This GenXer finds the propensity for other Gen- whatevers to piss on us tiresome. The loudest bitching a moaning about Obama comes from his own cohort anyway — including Stewart.
mai naem
Did it occur to Ames that maybe its because of the crappy media we have now. They’re pretty much all corporate suck up lazy pretty boys/girls who couldn’t report themselves out of a brown paper bag.
As far as Obama, its just been a disappointment and this is from somebody who wasn’t expecting a whole lot but was hoping for a whole lot. Now that I know I am not going to get a lot I wish Obama and Reid would do some major ass kicking of the Repubs. If Obama really wants to motivate his base, just one or two real good ass kickings would bring them back. Hell, McCain is practically begging for an ass whooping.
JC
Comrade Luke
That article doesn’t go into the progressive things that Obama HAS done, but let’s look at the list of what he has done that isn’t progressive:
1. “Nobody forced President Obama to escalate the war in Afghanistan”.
He actually was very clear about this, with the ‘good wars, bad wars’, analogy. This was a campaign promise by him, and he honored it.
Also – progressivism can exist besides having a ‘robust’ military. Roosevelt, Johnson, both Clintons – you have to go to Kucinich to get an active political figure who doesn’t embrace american might.
that’s a problem, as Chalmers writes about so cogently, given the cost of empire. but it’s an ‘american problem’, not a progressive problem.
2. “Nobody forced him to expand oil drilling in the Arctic rather than make the case that we need an emergency effort to end our addiction to all fossil fuels. ”
Actually, the 2nd part is definitely untrue – note the 100 billion on alternative energy, plus he has been fighting to get carbon passed, he just couldn’t ‘make’ it happen. And, the latest executive order STOPS, the expanding of oil drilling, right?
3. “Nobody forced him to have his Department of Justice ignore the Bush administration’s criminality. Nobody forced him to continue secret renditions or a policy of denying suspected terrorists the human right of due process. ”
I agree on this, and list this as a progressive problem, above. I would include the TSA as part of this.
4. “Nobody forced him to order his DOJ to appeal court rulings that would have ended Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”. This is unfair. This is a matter of LAW, and doing this the right way. He has a responsibility to represent current law, and that is why he is trying to repeal DADT as a matter of LAW.
5. “Nobody forced him to open a discussion about the deficit which even puts Social Security and Medicare on the table when the economy desperately needed and needs more Keynesian stimulus. ”
He hasn’t really put SS and Medicare ‘on the table’ in a significant way, at this point. This MAY end up being true, but it isn’t at this point. In addition, for the ‘MEDICARE’ part, it really is about MEDICAL COST DISCIPLINE. Every progressive knows this, and is aligned with it.
6. “. Nobody forced him to keep on Bush’s Defense Secretary. ”
Actually, I think this was a rather smart move. Gates has backed him up, supported DADT, removed the objection that ‘democrats are soft’, and Gates fundamentally pushed against, and won, against the neocons on Iran. He has pushed to reform the military, on weapons systems (as much as anyone) and has had the credibility to back it. And has backed START, of course.
He does the job well. This really isn’t a progressive/conservative position, if executed well.
7. “Nobody forced him to hire a neoliberal economic team and ignore the traditional liberal economists who had been almost alone in predicting the economic collapse.”
Well, again, there is some truth to this. But ‘neoliberal’ doesn’t mean what it meant in 1999. What you can say is that they refused to take on the banks, fundamentally. I agree. But certainly not ‘neoliberal’, in the conservative sense, given some of the accomplishments cited above. 40% true.
so of the seven points, I would only agree that two are absolutely true, with 2 others being somewhat true, with 3 others not being true.
And, of course, ignoring all the evidence of Obama’s progressivism.
A slanted article.
FormerSwingVoter
Heh. I think there’s a lot more truth in this than people want to admit.
JC
Thanks Mark.
The tendency on the internet (which I have as well) to only see thingsin absolutes, is really annoying.
So I thought I would push back a bit against that.
Jules
@JC:
Of course it isn’t but the internet and the village says it is so no one actually cares about the facts anymore.
Nellcote
The Hippies Were Right!
written by one of those younger punks, Mark Morford.
Ross Hershberger
The article cited is pretty fucking insulting. As well as overbroad and pessimistic.
But he does have a point about short attention spans.
The pony delivery’s late and a lot of people turn on Obama. Yeah, that happened.
One advantage that the stupid have is focus and purpose. They may be dead wrong but dammit they hang in there like a hair in a biscuit.
Nellcote
@bogart:
So this shit has been going on for 40+ years and the black guy failed to turn it around in 2 so now you’re all cynical and bitter?
Marc McKenzie
@Console: Right on.
Another problem progressives face in America is the lack of a robust media infrastructure. The Right has it, and has built it up over the past 30+ years. Us? Well….not so much. And throwing everything on the ‘net is a prime example of putting all the eggs in the basket.
And still another problem is that, well, we seem to be forgetting–or just plain forgot–that progressive politics is a long, hard slog. Things are going to take time. They are not going to get done in two seconds, two days, two months, two years. We are not going to repair the damage left behind by the piece of human waste named George W. Bush in a New York minute. Yes, there are valid criticisms to be made about Obama…but he also told us that this was not going to be an easy road.
I didn’t think the rally was a bad thing, and heck, there were more attendees than at the Beck rally.
Belvoir
Wow, that Ames article was fucking terrible. (Who?)
“It was this same lack of ironic self-awareness (or rather, this absence of any sort of mockery-avoidance technology) that led my generation to pillory the hippies and progressives–that’s why we were South Park Republicans before we were Daily Show Democrats: because back then, standing for liberal values meant something, and that made you look lame. “
Ugh, this and the rest of the incredibly long thing is like hipsters criticizing hipsters. With a frame of reference from 1995, written horribly. Why did you inflict this on us? Thoughtful discusssion? Blog-post from a jerk with ideas about his Generation?
Awful.
Short Bus Bully
@Kryptik:
You fucking nailed it. More people should go back and read this comment.
cleter
@Dennis SGMM:
“call me when you’ve stopped a war”
Umm..you know that the wars we’re in were started by boomers, right? George Bush? The senators and whatnot that authorized Iraq? They weren’t Gen X’ers.
Call us when we’ve started one.
Genine
and
This.
Seriously, what’s interesting about this is that much of the left complains that Obama is not looking out for their interests or pandering to them, the way the right panders to their base.
I’ve been wondering what the hell the Obama administration think its doing with some of these tactics. I’ve been severely disappointed in some things that have happened so far. I, too, wonder why doesn’t Obama or the Democrats listen to the base or follow the wishes of the left more? Then it occurred to me: why would he?
Yes, I agree that many of the things we wish he would do are “the right thing to do”. He should be for “the people” and not “the money.” I agree with all of these but I am also aware that Obama is working in an environment that wants none of these things.
So, he needs as much support as he can get to accomplish what needs to be done. But he doesn’t have that. I am NOT saying that we should “clap louder!” (though many will interpret what I am saying as exactly that because that is what will make them feel better) but one reason why the right panders to their base is that the base supports them and in return the Republicans throw them a bone every once in a while. Though the crazies haven’t gotten everything they wanted, they get more than we do from elected officials.
Many on the left complain about Obama’s ineffectual reach for the mushy and/or non-existent middle. Though I agree it is annoying as hell, I really don’t see he has much choice. Many on the left are terrible allies.
Though I was just a teenager, I remember a lot complaining about Clinton from the left. I am not saying criticism is underserved in either Clinton’s or Obama’s case but then it is followed with complaints of triangulation or “selling out.” So? Didn’t you just say that you weren’t voting for Obama, raising money, knocking on door, etc.? Aren’t you refusing to say anything positive about him and complain about him as much as possible to whoever listens? So, since you vowed not to vote for him and/or back a primary challenge, why should he cater to you?
But some say “If Obama does A, B, C, D, E, F, G” then I’ll vote for him and be on his side.” Okay. So in this current crazy environment, with very little support, he accomplishes A, B (imperfectly), C (with many concessions to the Right), D, and E,F, and G will have to wait until the next session because the clock is running out. Are these good statistics? No. But, given what’s going on, it’s not bad either because he did these things with the obstructionism of the right and the left saying they won’t vote for him, will primary him, he’s a sell-out, etc., etc.
Now, while the crazies on the right haven’t gotten a ban on homosexuality full-stop, a state church, bans on flag burning, a return to Jim Crow, the repeal of the 14th ande 19th Amendments they still have their elected officials using the “bully pulpit” to validate their issues and get the messenging across that these are reasonable things to want and the people who want these things are a political force to be reckoned with. Meanwhile, we on the left get little to nothing and wanting people not to starve or die from lack of health-care is considered “radical” and out of touch with real “American values.” We are “shrill” and “not serious people.” (Reality be damned, we are talking about the 24/7 news whores.)
Again, I wish to reiterate that I am not saying “clap louder”, what I am saying is that this President should be criticized. He has disappointed me quite a bit and I think there are many things that should be done differently. But we can learn something from the products of the “Reagan Revolution.”
When some wingnut group or blog didn’t get their pony from the Reagan or the Bushes or some nutter congressperson the message would be along the lines of “We support President/Senator/Representative X. S/he has always respresented the values of Y and we applaud that. However, due to evil leftists and the liberal media, President/Senator/Representative X hasn’t done what we wanted. We understand the challenges s/he faces but s/he must understand how important this issue is to us if s/he wants to have our support.” Then the politician in question still doesn’t accomplish what they want, but s/he speaks some words they like (massaging their ego), some backroom promises/deals are made, the media talks of the power and influence of this particular group/blog, and the wingnut blog/organization continues to support that candidate. For their support, the winguts get their A, B, C, D (watered down), E but not F and G and they are considered important by the media, and politicians quake in their boots at the idea of pissing these people off.
So why aren’t Democrats scared of pissing off the left? It’s so easy to do, why worry about it? The left has been after Obama from day one. He was sworn in January 20th, 2009 and by early March 2009, many lefties have sworn never to vote for him. He should be primaried, etc. He tackles health care instead of climate change and he is THE WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD! He asked Rick Warren to speak and he is a HOMOPHOBE. (Subsequently, the administration has done other things since then that would make it suspect in the LGBT community, but this was before the man was even inaugurated.) When he tries to work with the banks to stabilize the economy (something I don’t necessarily agree with either) he is a CORPORATIST! If some of us suggest that we coordinate attacks, target Congress (which actually makes the laws) or band together on an issue to get it done, we are called “Obots” who “hippy-punch” those who “criticize Dear Leader.” It gets to the point where the conventional wisdom is you cannot make the left happy, ever, so why try? Let’s try to get these “moderates” because they may be more loyal than the left. On the left, if a congressperson vote for a public option, extend unemployment, vote for middle-class tax cuts but support tax cuts for those making $1 million and below they’re a SELLOUT and WORSE THAN BUSH!. So while I thinking getting “moderates” is a stupid approach, I can see where they’re coming from.
But what about the teabaggers? Those people are unhappy with what the Republicans are doing and turning things around so that they are taken seriously. Why can’t the left do the same? Yes, the teabaggers are turning on the Republicans, but how long did that take to happen? Almost 30 years? And in that 30 years, they’ve become a powerful voting block that needs to be catered to because they are known for their support and loyalty. How long does it take the left to turn on Democrats? 30 days. And we spend most of our time attacking each other instead of working towards our goals. Take the social cons, neocons, and Wall Street: they don’t agree on everything either, but they agree they hate liberals, women and brown people and they have built a powerful coalition.
So why can’t we agree on something positive and work towards that? If we work together and show support for those that will get something done with it, in time, we can seen as a political force that needs to be reckoned with. Instead of pundits talking about how Senator so-and-so better start hating gays if he wants to be elected, the story can be Senator so-and-so better vote to combat climate change and support a public option if he wants to be elected.
Criticism needs to be disciplined with an eye on accomplishing something and making our elected officials do what we want. What is going on now isn’t working. This isn’t about “clapping louder” or squashing criticism, its about optics and how we can effectively criticize. Currently, there is no price to be paid for pissing off the left. Yes, the left will not vote for that person, but the way things are that was bound to happen on some issue or other so why try to figure them out?
The left complains about having no allies, but what kind of allies are they?
Dennis SGMM
@cleter:
Right. I will applaud as you whine your way to greatness.
Tyro
@Comrade Luke:
I actually thought that Daily Kos post missed an important issue that I haven’t heard anyone from the “Obama is really a conservative” side answer: Obama may or may not be a conservative. It’s undeniable, however, that he’s a Democrat. Even if he’s not progressive, you would think that part of his goal would be to shore up and strengthen his own party. By all accounts, he hasn’t done a good job in that department. Since he’s definitely a Democrat, even if he’s a non-progressive one, why is such a “competent” Democrat doing so much damage to the Democratic party and its position?
Suffern ACE
I think I can remain ironic longer than they can remain phoney. My defense against them hasn’t led my generation to do much grand institution building…but at least it hasn’t caused us to be permanently upset and scared to leave our houses.
jcricket
@Kryptik: Right on. The reason I’m despondent is I’m closing in on 40. My 401k is worth maybe what I have put into it for 14 years. I’ve been laid off a couple of times, and despite finding employment every time and still earnings that put me/us in the top 5% of all Americans, I can’t help but thinking we’re just one financial reversal away from moving back in with my parents. And I’m one of the lucky ones (good skills, no debt, large savings). I can only imagine what it’s like for the 80% of the country who’s middle class of below.
I look around this country and think – if the next 40 years are anything like 2000-2006 we’re all FUCKING SCREWED. Our infrastructure will crumble. Our schools will fail. Our markets will tank. Jobs will be scare(r). Healthcare will be unaffordable to all but the select few. Smart people will flock to other countries.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m still going to vote, and I’m not leaving the country. I’m impressed Obama and the Dems managed to pull anything off (esp. healthcare). I’m just depressed that Democrats dick around, make change only at the margins and then allow Republicans to own all the airspace and get themselves re-elected (to further fuck the country). Social Security, Medicare, the modicum of regulations that keep our food, roads, schools (somewhat) safe will all be gone if Republicans really get their way. This shit matters, and dumbshit tools like Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, “independents” like Lieberman and even the moderate Republicans (Snowe, in particular) are sitting around with their thumbs up their ass b/c of their deep, deep love for Roberts Rules of Order. ARGH!
So half of me is mad as hell, and the other is incredibly depressed that I live in a country full of tea-baggers and Democrats (outside of Pelosi) don’t seem to understand how to play to win.
CircleSquared
@Jean: Oh, how I wish I’d had that pithy summary on income inequality to take with me to the church wars on tithes and tithing…bad enough not to have money without putting up with the sanctimonious lectures by the wealthy on “people who don’t contribute.”
OK, ’nuff said.
Back On Topic: I, too, am thankful Krytiq debugged this article. Frankly, it wasn’t helpful to me at all in trying to understand the situation.
cleter
@Dennis SGMM: well, just clean up your mess in Iraq and Afghanistan before you start congratulating yourselves on Viet Nam. If you make those less f–ed up then they were when you broke them, then you can denigrate other generations all you want. We can all start hating Generation Y together or something.
HE Pennypacker, Wealthy Industrialist
I’ll read the comments here in a moment, but I just want to blindly say that I thought the time of blaming Gen-Xers for not sufficiently upholding the hippy ideal was over. Did I misread the intent of the article?
Sly
@Tyro:
I’d say that whole paragraph amounts to argumentum ad populum, but when you actually check its missing the whole populum part. He’s been hovering around 80% approval among Democrats for the past year.
Clearly the man is destroying the party because, as we all know, “liberals on the internet” is the only Democratic constituency. Or, I dunno, maybe some people just need to get out more.
priscianus jr
@Short Bus Bully:
Wile E. Quixote
@JMC_in_the_ATL:
Every time I see the initials of the official Balloon Juice ombudsman I think “Erectile Dysfunction”.
Crusty Dem
How this douchebag hasn’t been hired by the Washington Post yet completely escapes me. He’d make a perfect liberal WaPost pundit. His 2004 post linked above could easily have been a more
verbose and idiotic Maureen Dowd. Impressive..
HE Pennypacker, Wealthy Industrialist
I’m going to add that, yes, my generation learned that irony is a weapon of sorts. It should be of interest that comics like Stewart/Colbert seem like the only valid critics you can find on cable news of the power in Washington. And that is a critique of the Wolf Blitzers and such who control the political dialogue in this country.
Wile E. Quixote
@Dennis SGMM:
You boomer douchebags didn’t stop a war. Jesus, when it comes to stopping Vietnam your generation was completely and totally ineffective. Yeah, let’s see, all of that protesting back in 1967 and 1968 sure did a lot of good. Nixon got elected and started bombing Cambodia. Daniel Ellsberg probably did more to end the Vietnam war, by leaking The Pentagon Papers and showing what a total clusterfuck and farrago of lies the whole thing was, than your entire generation did.
Do you want to know why members of Generation X hate you bastards so goddamned much? It’s because you’re so goddamned full of shit. You didn’t end Vietnam, your protesting was ineffective and more often than not masturbatory as well. And a lot of members of your generation were quite gung-ho for Vietnam. OK, admittedly they weren’t gung-ho for serving in Vietnam (see Tom Tancredo, Rush Limbaugh, et al) but they were very much in favor of sending other people to Southeast Asia to get blown to hell and gone. And who did members of your generation turn out and vote for in 1972 after 18 year olds got the vote? Well it sure wasn’t George McGovern. Richard M. Nixon did quite well with the boomers.
If the generation that won World War II is going to be called “The Greatest Generation” then let me submit to you that the sobriquet for the Baby Boomers should be “The Overhyped Generation” or maybe “The Generation That Took Credit For a Bunch of Things They Never Really Accomplished”.
JWL
After 4 decades, I finally washed my hands the democratic party (and Obama) after the FISA vote in June of 2008. I think I voted the Peace & Freedom ticket that November.
I’d been a registered Independent all my life, and cast my first vote in ’74. I invariably voted democratic thereafter.
Although it took the FISA double-cross to wise me up, I had Obama sized up as republican-lite months before that vote. Until then, I had wished him well, but only because my contempt of Clinton, and her endorsement of the treason committed by those who engineered the 2003 war against Iraq.
Yet even I’ve been shocked at his political incompetence. He’s treated the Bully Pulpit as a psychiatrist’s office, in which he could treat Jack The Ripper as a simple minded patient who could be reasoned with.
And that’s putting his behavior in charitable terms.
Jrod the Cookie Thief
@Wile E. Quixote: It’s hilarious that Boomers convince themselves that they ended the Vietnam War with their protests. Sure, and the Tet Offensive being waged after Americans had been hearing for months that the Viet Cong couldn’t possibly have much fight left in them, and after more than 60k Americans came home in bags, had nothing to do with it.
Nope, Americans just woke up one day, decided that those hippies were right after all, and demanded that we get out of Vietnam because hey man, peace is groovy.
This is not to say that the movements of the sixties were worthless. Many great things came out of that era. Ending American wars was just not one of them.
And, you know, I’d be a lot more impressed with the boomers if they hadn’t turned around and become Ronald Reagan’s most fervent supporters. It’s almost as though, after the 70s went down in flames, the hippies decided that left-wing politics were too hard, so fuck it. This Reagan guy says I’m awesome, and all the nation’s problems are caused by people who aren’t like me. It’s morning in America! The dream is finally realized!
Of course, generalizing about generations is usually stupid, and to whatever extent it’s useful my generation comes across no better, except in one respect: we don’t strut around crowing about how uniquely great our generation was.
Oh, and we’re far less sexist and racist. But I attribute that to the hard work of those boomers who didn’t give up, so let’s call it a wash.
Wile E. Quixote
From the GOS
Hear hear. Gates is a great SecDef. Gates fired the secretary of the Air Force and the Air Force chief of staff for the Air Force’s fuckups with nuclear weapons. He fired their asses and made it clear that they were being fired and why they were being fired. They didn’t get a chance to resign and claim that they were doing so “to spend more time with their families”. They were fired.
Gates also fired the secretary of the Army in 2007 over the Walter Reed fuckups and shot down the F-22. He’s the only SecDef I can remember who has even mentioned the idea that the US can only remain strong militarily if it remains strong economically (he’s probably the only Republican to mention that since Eisenhower).
Please, who should Obama have appointed as SecDef? If this is your typical Daily Kos article the answer is probably Dennis Kucinich.
Chuck Butcher
@Genine:
Considerably better than their supposed ones. Oh I’m sure the internet left you’re in an uproar about is what you say or engaging in temper tantrums previous to turning out and doing the work again. Let’s roll the clock a bit and look at ’60’s moderate liberalism and today’s left and today’s center and center Democrat. Funny thing happens, the left looks a lot like moderate liberalism of the 60s and the center D looks like a Nixonian R.
Funny thing about the stuff the 60,70,80, 90s left was warning about and today. Doesn’t make you popular to say, “told ya so,” but it is about what the left has. You don’t like us, think we’re full of shit, and that’s old fucking news. Today’s younger left is pretty testy, I don’t much blame them considering the fucking mess.
Of course the pay back for getting ignored is catching a rash of shit from dumbasses like Wile E, while he was real damn busy ignoring also. I’m way past getting pissed off about it, you will do it how you do and have done until the shit really hits the fan. That is what it takes if you care to read history.
Wile E. Quixote
@Odie Hugh Manatee:
No way dude. Not only is he a long time reader, but he’s also aware of all internet traditions as well.
Wile E. Quixote
@Chuck Butcher:
What the fuck are you babbling about Chuck? You’re about as coherent as Glenn Beck on a nitrous jag. I mean what the fuck does that paragraph even mean? “…while he was real damn busy ignoring also”. What was I “…real damn busy ignoring also”? Also did you ever consider that the reason you were being ignored was perhaps because you’re a self-righteous asshole. No, of course not, that sort of thing never occurs to self-righteous assholes.
Chuck Butcher
@Jrod the Cookie Thief:
Actually most of the social changes you like happened because the Boomer left came out and played hard. There was a side benfit to that, and the right got it. They took accurate measure of the changes the DFHs made and hated for it and turned that hate into political power. It still is political power, it is the source of the drooling hatred of the left in GOPer ranks today. It was Nixon, it was Reagan. it … oh hell it’s Limpball and Beckkk.
The Vietnam war ended because the draft and the numbers meant too many lost too much but never forget who drove at it and drove at it and helped make it acceptable to tell the govt “hell no.” To listen to you wank you’d think there’d never been body bags and losses before or wars the public didn’t quite “get”.
Did you forget whose bodies were in the dike, Boomer kids motrher fucker – not you. Do you somehow forget that it was Kerry who got mocked with bandaids. Ah hell, this is a waste of time.
Chuck Butcher
@Wile E. Quixote: Of course I’m a self righteous asshole, and so are you. so what. See the graph below regarding.
You bitch about Boomers, the Boomer left told you what was coming. Your left told you. The left keeps telling you. You keep telling the DFHs they’re mockable. Hell, I agree since keeping on thinking somebody will listen has proved a chimera for long enough that continuing meets the definition of insanity. “doing the same thing and expecting different results”
Andrew
Anybody notice these primary challenge posts popping up on Huffington Post?
I do like Robert Kuttner, and he’s often made some good points, especially about having a direct-hiring program. But the piece seems awfully over-the-top. I wish progressives would stop the “Obama is Hoover” nonsense, considering Hoover actively worsened the Depression, turning it from a manageable crisis into a catastrophe; the worst one can say about Obama is that his response has been insufficient, not actively harmful.
Still, it has some interesting insinuations that “progressive organizations” and labor are considering backing a primary challenger.
I don’t buy it, but curious what others think.
Chuck Butcher
I think, speaking as a lefty, that trying to Primary Obama is a fool’s errand. He is what he is, a pragmatic barely left of center politician, (I refuse to speculate about his personal leanings). He is also electable, even as the Right’s socialist boogeyman. He is a man faced with some of the worst problems politically, socially, and economically since FDR and has managed.
The left sees a resounding smash headed our way and thinks they’re the political answer to heading it off. I think they’re right about the smash coming and I think their answers are better and I think that counts for exactly nothing as well. What the left forgets is that their answers will be looked at and taken more seriously in a smash. Ask TR, FDR, Lincoln, Jefferson (et al).
While there’s hope the status quo can work, it will be applied. Most people hate change – fuck what they say, see what they do. This is one reason the minor changes of Obama have hit such a wall – you have to sell the hell out of them … continually.
I don’t think Obama or any of the Democrats can stop the smash, what I hope is that they can mitigate it and mitigate the suffering some.
40yrs ago I’d never have believe this country could be in the shape it is in, then came Nixon and I saw what we’d wrought with our Revolution. I hoped it would die with those fucks aging and dying … I hadn’t counted on the hate and its power and its ability to migrate across generations. The younger left hasn’t watched this happen.
Being right doesn’t matter if people don’t have a good reason to pay attention.
Chuck Butcher
moderation hell, s word
I think, speaking as a lefty, that trying to Primary Obama is a fool’s errand. He is what he is, a pragmatic barely left of center politician, (I refuse to speculate about his personal leanings). He is also electable, even as the Right’s soshalist boogeyman. He is a man faced with some of the worst problems politically, socially, and economically since FDR and has managed.
The left sees a resounding smash headed our way and thinks they’re the political answer to heading it off. I think they’re right about the smash coming and I think their answers are better and I think that counts for exactly nothing as well. What the left forgets is that their answers will be looked at and taken more seriously in a smash. Ask TR, FDR, Lincoln, Jefferson (et al).
While there’s hope the status quo can work, it will be applied. Most people hate change – fuck what they say, see what they do. This is one reason the minor changes of Obama have hit such a wall – you have to sell the hell out of them … continually.
I don’t think Obama or any of the Democrats can stop the smash, what I hope is that they can mitigate it and mitigate the suffering some.
40yrs ago I’d never have believe this country could be in the shape it is in, then came Nixon and I saw what we’d wrought with our Revolution. I hoped it would die with those fucks aging and dying … I hadn’t counted on the hate and its power and its ability to migrate across generations. The younger left hasn’t watched this happen.
Being right doesn’t matter if people don’t have a good reason to pay attention.
Wile E. Quixote
@Chuck Butcher:
Chuck you’re a self-righteous and ineffectual old twat who’s every bit as full of himself, and of shit, as anyone posting over on FreeRepublic or RedState. You’re the kind of useless, ineffectual leftist asshole that John Scalzi was referring to when he wrote his essay I Hate Your Politics.
Wile E. Quixote
@Chuck Butcher
Yeah, not only are you an idiot, but you’re an idiot who engages in magical thinking. Yeah, perhaps after a horrible crash the country will realize that conservatism is a load of horseshit. Or perhaps they’ll do what the Germans did after Weimar and double down on the crazy.
Chuck Butcher
@Wile E. Quixote:
Thanks for the in depth psycho-analysis based on a tiny body of work published in BJ. Unlike yourself I am quite searchable as all my activities are under my actual name. Last time I looked, over a year ago, Google had nine pages of me before various meat products started to get heavy. Don’t know any more.
As far as ineffectual some of my legacy will house families decades after I die, large chunks of forest will stand because I risked fighting fires, some pols I helped will make some kind of impact, some of the kids I helped up out of poverty with jobs, training, and fair wages will do something from that start.
As for your little fuck’s wet dream about the left … buy in all you care to. I long ago understood how that was going to work out.
Chuck Butcher
@Wile E. Quixote:
Yep, that’s the rub. That is always what disasters mean, it ain’t gonna be like it was. Doesn’t change what I said. I never suggested trying to set one off. You’ll do that fine on your own, just as you have up to here. I’ll continue to do what I can to mitigate but you’ve made roles clear haven’t you? As has the voting public.
Uriel
Sigh. Yes, because Woodstock was so fucking idealistic, what with all the people who attended for the sole purpose of getting some drugged out hippie strange. Or at least, some of the drugs the strange were doing. Or just wanted to see the Who.
What fucking ever. It would be nice if, in the midst of all the generational self high fiving the boomers are so driven to engage in, they would at least once admit that a lot of those assholes screaming death threats at 7 year old black kids in Boston and Mississippi were also members of the “best generation evah.”
And don’t even get me started on all those votes Reagan got out of the free-love set once they realized that coke costs money. Remind me again- how much of the popular vote did Nixon loose by? Or bush the 1st?
Or is that what you’re going to hang you’re historical hat on- “Well, we had this really big concert, and voted for Jimmy Carter. Once. Then things got all complicated…”
Color me unimpressed.
Chuck Butcher
@Uriel: Oooh, how deep, how insightful – po po you. Nobody is responsible/reflective for their entire generation, and usually not very large chunks of it, individualism and all. But you’ve got your little issue thingie going on and I certainly do have to give you this one, the Rights’ vast slobbering hate of the left and their political power drawn from it is no doubt our doing. Along with your slobbering…
SectarianSofa
Meh.
((Just kidding.)
And I was kidding when I said I was kidding.))
Sigh.
Meta. First, Last, Alpha and so on.
[footnote: please, God, keep me posted about the posting post-ironic posts. My vanity demands it.
(Also, I don’t believe in god, so, this means you, but not, you know, solipsistically (which is why I’m writing like this, using occasional punctuation — so that you know that you know, god that isn’t god, [meaning you, meaning whoever is reading this, aka nobody, aka you who are nobody, aka you who are not nobody who am I addressing as, not really, nobody] I’m not a totally glib shit who doesn’t take this seriously. For real.) ]
I’ve lost track of closures. Is this where I was? Parenthetically, how did it used to taste when the horses and the houses and the sounds of the train to work were so loud, so present, so hail up the roof and hand to mouth serious?
And, I’m out.
Jrod the Cookie Thief
@Chuck Butcher: No shit, there were many Boomers who fought the hard fight to make this country a halfway decent place to exist for people who weren’t rich white males. I’m eternally grateful to those who did so. But don’t pretend that these people were representative of the entire generation. And don’t pretend that they had a damn thing to do with ending the Vietnam War.
Whatever broad opposition to wars of aggression being waged by the US evaporated along with the draft. For most Boomers, once their own asses were no longer on the line, they stopped caring. The Boomers didn’t stop Reagan from turning half of South America into a bloody torture chamber. Most of them were just fine with it.
This doesn’t make them worse than any other generation. It makes them exactly the same.
I’ll gladly give props to the individuals and groups who struggled for the good fight. I will not credit their whole generation for their accomplishments.
But, so sorry I wasn’t there to fight the good fight more than ten years before I was born. A severe moral defect on the part of my whole generation, to be sure.
Uriel
@Chuck Butcher:
Know what? I agree. Entirely.
And I don’t, particularly, have an issue with boomers as individuals. I do, however, have an issue with people going the whole “hippies rule, punkers drool,” “age of aquarius” route, which seems to be an unstated premise of the OP. I have no problem admitting that the number of people in any generation that are truly dedicated to selfless advocacy of the interests of others are always, always going to be a minority.
I just wish that the boomers would grant the proceeding generations the same kind of wiggle room they incessantly claim as their god given right, just on the basis of “well, Viet Nam.”
I mean, fuck, we did just elect the first black president- and according to the polling, it was despite the boomers, not because of them.
Uriel
@Jrod the Cookie Thief: Or, in other words, this.
Chuck Butcher
@Jrod the Cookie Thief:
I think this generational shit is just that. As for the war, you have no clue what you’re talking about, that wasn’t the first killing draft or high number death – it was the first stopped by the public. That public turned as it never had and some of that had to do with being given permission. fuck it, it would be dead history except for one thing – the GOP lives on it. Go down the list of their hates and matfch them with some point in time. It is pathetic that an entire national political organization is mustered in it’s social views around a decade or so that half a century old at its start.
Growing up when I did was a strange thing, but I haven’t seen anything since that looked a heck of lot easier-just different.
Chuck Butcher
there seems to be something I’ve missed here and I think I understand now. Stopping the war may have been a polical left goal, but its stopping was a social phenom of that ? Revolution. The left never had any particular political power in that era (oh fuck moderate was a lot lefter than now) but social changes were huge. Nixon was the payback for those changes and the GOP has never let go of that hate. That did huge damage to whatever influence the left had and poisoned the word for most of the country. DFH replaced communism finally.
Dennis G does a great job of tracking a lot of hate back to the Civil War Era, but it seems to me that the modern version’s genisis is the 60s (roughly). Plutocracy/corporatism piggy backed it as the GOP flogged it. sucks as an outcome.
Genine
@Chuck Butcher:
We have a much different media environment today then we had in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. Now something like 95% of the media is owned by five corporations and we know that at least one of those corporations (NewsCorp) is run my a man with a right-wing agenda. (Murdoch).
The left needs to be more careful and disciplined in its messaging. It like you said, there is no use being right if no one is paying attention. I would add to that there is no use in being right if people are convinced you are wrong. Despite the growth of the blogsphere, a lot of people watch the nightly news and television news programs and I know a number of people who think Obama is a radical leftist because “that’s what they say on the news.”
To suggest any course of action short of PRIMARY HIM! DON’T VOTE FOR HIM! or say he’s WORSE THAN BUSH is to be called an Obot, a corporatist or not-a-true-progressive. This kind of in-fighting does no good, especially since we all agree on the big picture. The socialcons, neocons and Wall Street don’t even agree on the big picture. They rely on mutual hatred of the poor, brown and female. I would like to think we could at least come together for common goals, allowing the yellers to yell, the dealers to deal and the rest to support the policies thereby creating a united front with a coherent message that can reach even the most low-information voter.
Isaakh
I’m way late too the game, but there were lots of people protesting the invasion of Iraq and Bush got protested almost every where he went.
Karen
I missed the baby boom by one year, I think I’m baby bust or maybe Gen X, they change the definitions and criteria.
I think part of the biggest problem with Obama and the Dems in general is that except for a handful, the Dems in office now are basically the Republicans of the 70s and even part of the 80s.
Another thing is that a lot of the baby boom that were the Woodstock generation have become conservative as they own more properties and stocks and have more money. Those same people who were protesting are voting Republican because they don’t want to pay taxes. They tend to be socially moderate but they care more about their investments and their money than they do about gay rights, or a woman’s right to choose.
The Dems have just learned a huge lesson about what happens when you’re not “pro-business:” your opponents get huge windfalls of money from big business and the banks and the Chamber of Commerce and they can carpetbomb with ads. How much do you want to bet that they will be more pro-business from now on?
Ironically, I’ve been following the TPM Obama polls averaging Gallop and Rasmussen and while he was at a -5 point spread between approval and disapproval the week of the election, he is now at -1.91. That means his approval and disapproval is almost equivalent (except for Rasmussen of course).
I think Obama had the idea that he would let the GOP hang themselves with the crazy rope and that once the world saw how evil and cuckoo bananas they were they’d show their disapproval at the election polls. Unfortunately, the country has yet to reach the bottom of what is too crazy or mean.
That’s the thing about Saraphiles (because the GOP no longer exists and the Tea Party are her acolytes). They’re hateful, kick the inferm and say horrid racist things about Obama but then they say that Dems are “mean.”
Yeah right.
Chuck Butcher
@Genine: You’ll probably miss this, but anyhow. The left is a hell of a lot of things and scattered all over hell and probably seen only partially on blogs. This form of communication is inducive to all kinds of excess and intemperance, particularly in anonymity. You have no idea who these commenters are, if they are spoofs, clods, nuts, or genuine. It isn’t just left blogs, the right ones are just as subject.
this shit feeds off itself. Christ, Fuckstuck has me labeled a racist Obama hater because I’ve dared criticize and yet I find myself on another thread asking people if they’re crazy coming up with horseshit about the Pres.
I post in the wide open – it is my own warning to myself as well as my defense – you can find me and what there is to know. (no not my vitals) If you lie about me as Stuck did, I’m there, there’s nothing hidden. See for yourself. I don’t have to toot my horn, there are news stories about me and political doings reports and other sources reports.
this is hardly ever the case, people hide and once done they get … sparky. Half of the real left I personally know from being an operator in Democratic Party of Oregon never go near blogs and half those that do aren’t where you’d see them. I am talking about left in the State of Oregon, here.
Chuck Butcher
@Karen:
Gee, the Senate Caucus is probably more liberal now than anytime I can think of across say 40 members (+/- however). I actually mean that in reference to the 60s even. The overall effect is essentially what you’re saying, 80s R. That’s the rules and seniority of the body and I’ve grown to hate them. The electorate and officials are more right damn near yearly. To roll that back takes nearly constant campaigning and grass roots action and of that a large portion face to face. Just managing to get liberal across is complicated, never mind left. Doing something is a hell of a lot more complicated than just saying no or status quo.
I doubt anyone since FDR has faced a bigger mess than Obama does and he’s managed. I don’t think he’s proven to be a great but managing is damned good. I don’t know what he’s got in him, if he’s got great he needs to find it pretty soon because he has a shit load of enemies in GOP clothes and some in another.
Chris
@Karen:
Not unlike the Dixiecrats handing out fliers in the sixties saying that the Civil Rights Act would enslave white people.
Bullies are always scared, insecure little shits on the inside.
JMC_in_the_ATL
@Wile E. Quixote: In my head, I refer to him as the Ordinary Gentleman from Pfizer.
Nick
@Maody:
Gen Y is not a generation that opens a can o’whoop ass on each other over things they’re not interested in. Their energy is saved for arguing over who should win American Idol and whether or not Snooki or Sammi Sweetheart should date that dude. They’re not going to interrupt fist pumping to discuss tax cuts for the rich.
Obama built his entirely presidency on a group of people who couldn’t care less about anything political. He did it by branding himself as “the ‘in’ thing” in 2008. It was a smart move to get elected, but it doesn’t translate into governing.
cleter
@Wile E. Quixote: Maybe they helped end Viet Nam, maybe not. But it’s undeniable that boomers were the architects of the Iraq debacle.
Oh, and boomers? At least we got our McGovern elected. You couldn’t do that. More than half of the youth vote went to Nixon. Later, you guys pushed Bush over the top, too. So, thanks for Nixon and Iraq, guys.
Suffern ACE
@Nick: And the path toward neverending intra-generational resentment continues. I couldn’t stand the Boomers in the 80s when I was a teen because they kept calling the music I listened to insubstantial, unlike the great socially relevant novelty acts of their youth. They thought we were hopelessly shallow. Unfotunately, unlike the A-Team, todays young people grew up on a steady diet of insubstantial piffle and don’t listen to the Smiths and so they are hopelessly shallow.
My take on the Gen Y folks I work with is that they really hate conflict at their young ages and won’t be stepping out much until it is over and what they liked about Obama is that he promised to work to end the conflict. Turns out that painting him as the “most divisive president ever” since the day he took office might not have been all that stupid on the Right’s part. Cause Dude-these conflicts aren’t their problems.
I don’t think these problems are going to be solved by 20 more years of get-off-my-lawnism. Keep the infernal “whose the worst generation” discussions away from Gen Y and look like you’re interested in solving the conflcts that the older generations have created and they’ll come back.
MTiffany
Oh yes it’s all our fault because we’re so fucking needy, impatient, and shallow whereas Mr. Fierce Advocate has clearly demonstrated time and again how eager he is to fight in defense of the principles his marketing team pushed so hard.
different church-lady
Or maybe it was just a bunch of people having fun in the face of a world gone mad.
It’s difficult to say when you’re a journalist with a rod up your effin’ ass.
different church-lady
@MTiffany:
Isn’t it kind of amazing how this writer managed to take a parody rally that wasn’t about Obama, make it all about Obama, and have people buy into it immediately?
different church-lady
@Mithras: Here, this should give you some fresh contenders.
different church-lady
@Andrew:
You too? I was beginning to believe I was the only one!
different church-lady
@Kryptik:
Fixed.
A L
@Chris:
That’s really not true. Some bullies get scared in the face of overwhelming force. Some don’t. You don’t know until you knuckle up.
At any rate, Jon Daily is great as baby’s first leftism, but aside from mocking the right he’s basically an empty suit and not worth any serious consideration.
cyntax
Sorry if someone already posted this, but I found the above quote a little ironic considering that one of the main complaints about Obama from the Left is that he doesn’t appear to fight. Now whether that’s true or not is another matter, but flies pretty squarely in the face of Ames’ hypothesis. Of course perhaps it could be argued that it isn’t Gen X/Yers making this complaint, but then we have Anthony Weiner (a friend of Stewart’s) saying this today:
So maybe this inter-generational schtick is just–you know–schtick.
Peter Pendantic
The boomer cohort was from post-WW2 to the early/mid 60’s. 1955 would be just about the middle not the back end.
Marketers got this cold even if you don’t.